Should Twitter itself get a state sponsored label for getting concessions from San Francisco on their headquarters? https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-controller-hails-... Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding? It's hard to see this as anything but silly politics games.
NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
481–490 of 1001 posts
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#482It's so wild witnessing the degradation of Twitter.
People keep saying this but I haven't noticed at all, I stopped using it for years but now I am back and have noticed only improvements
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#483Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
"media"
Various companies in China are on US embargo lists because they are state-affiliated. Parsing out "media" companies is just hyper-targeting of ire. All companies that post tweets are effectively media. So why only highlight "news media" on a publication app such as Twitter?
And it makes sense for the label to be applied specifically to media entities because journalists are supposed to be unbiased, as opposed to e.g. Raytheon which is objectively state-affiliated but nobody expects to be doing objective reporting.
If a media outlet is being funded by the government then readers should know that because it could affect their coverage if they fear losing that funding as a result of critical reporting. This directly applies to NPR because Republicans regularly threaten to remove its public funding in response to their coverage.
The better criticism is, why is the label applied to NPR but not e.g. MSNBC? Pretty sure at least Comcast (MSNBC's parent company) receives a significant amount of government funding.
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#485Earlier quoted context omitted.
NPR needs money and they need editorial freedom, they seem to have both. I really can't fault them for that, editorial independence is the yardstick by which media should be judged unless there is outright ownership.
State funding of media, regardless of how it’s structured, creates an obvious conflict of interest with editorial freedom. Theoretically it’s possible for a state funded media company to exercise editorial freedom, just like it would be theoretically possible for a climate study funded by ExxonMobile to exercise academic freedom, but not without acknowledging that the conflict of interest exists. Maybe they are a hig…
Any attempt to whitewash even aspects of it is in part giving credit to it and I'm just not going to carry Musk's water on this. It's a petty move by a petty person, who uses the platform that he bought to further his new best buddies interests by fomenting distrust in media institutions that he can't buy or control.
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#486Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#487Welcome to the club.
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#488Headline is incorrect. NPR’s label at the time of their departure was “government-funded media”. Changed after Musk conceded he got it wrong with the first label “State affiliated media”.
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#489Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Please act in good faith. You know why Twitter did what it did, and you know why it was wrong. We know you know that. NPR is not state affiliated, or even government funded. Fox news airs ads from the US Military - is it state affiliated?
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I think he would be much more psychology healthy if he dropped social media. From what I guess about his personality, it's bad for him, and also probably doesn't address any of his psychological needs. Bad habits can be hard to break, but man does he go all in.
If Twitter is the game, Musk is the whale with so much money that he bought the company. He spent $44 billion trying to win the game. And the wild thing to me is that he's still failing at it. Things like "let that sink in" [1] and re-labeling the building "Titter" [2] are just not very good jokes. For a mere one billion dollars, he could have hired every good comedy writer in the world. Instead he has lost at least $24 billion while generating enormous amounts of reputation-puncturing press and very plausibly putting a famously hard-to-wreck company on the path to irrelevancy. If it's not the most spectacular own-goal in business history, I'd certainly like to hear about the worse ones.
[1] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/let-t...
[2] https://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-twitter-headquarters-sign-pain...
[3] https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/26/23657182/elon-musk-twitte...